Is Iambiguous...

[Zero_Sum]

[Peter Kropotkin]

as for me, I believe IAM to be the best philosopher on this site,
bar none....as to my reasons?

I believe Iam is the best philosopher here because he is attempting to
solve the problem/problems that vex him and that is the point of
philosophy.... to solve problems.. now some problems require tools,
tools like science or math or history or economics or even logic...
but he is using that tool we call "philosophy"... and he is the only person
here who is attempting to solve his own problems using philosophy....
(I am exempting myself for obvious reasons)

the real reason that IAM is the best philosopher here is because he is
staying true, being committed to solving his problems...
he doesn't go off message and derail a thread... his concern is
strictly about what concerns him... and frankly, I admire him
for his patience and persistence to keep up the good fight to
address his concerns....now some of you kids accuse him of derailing
a thread, whereas I don't see that at all..... he is keeping on message with
the concerns he is engaged with..

His questions of existence are different then mine, I will admit to that,
but they are still legitimate concerns and worthy of discussion
and, AND admiration...

IAM has his set of problems and he is seeking a solution/solutions for
those set of problems... no different then Hume or Kant or Heidegger.....
and with a focus on his philosophical problems that we should congratulate
him for... not knock him....

I would in fact suggest that he is mocked and derided on this board
because of his dedication and his commitment to his issues....
and frankly, the kids just aren't smart enough to see that IAM
problems aren't just small, objectivist problems but universal
and in dire need of a solution problems....

I would suggest that his "divided" Mind/ soul are a modern
and universal problem created by the various and unique
issues brought about by Modernity...I would suggest that what he
describes about himself is just other words we often use about ourselves,
alienation, disconnection, estrangement, separation....these words are quite
often used in a description about the 20/21 century and the people who
live within the 20/21th century...

how do we, individually and collectively overcome our alienation, disconnection,
estrangement and separation between the society and ourselves, between
individuals and other individuals and most importantly, the alienation we
feel about ourselves... for we our alienated from ourselves... whether
we decide to face it and admit it to ourselves or not...

IAM "fracture and divided self" is just a single person examination
of what it means to live within the 21st century...

and in many ways, the single most important question of our times....

how do we become whole again?

I can see the "fractured and divided" self within many people here at
ILP... but can they see it within their own understanding and experience
of existing? NO, I doubt it...IAM is where practically everyone at ILP
needs to be.... working out their own questions of existence....

working out the questions of modernity... what does it mean to be human?

and how do we overcome the modern state of being "fracture and divided?"

so instead of condemning IAM, we should be following him into the path of
an examination of who we are and what does it take to go from
animal to animal/human to finally, finally becoming fully human.....

you are "fracture and divided" the only difference between you
and IAM is the fact he understand that and he is working toward a solution....

whereas you are not.....he see's deeper then you do and you of course,
condemn him because you are afraid of looking too deep within yourself...
because you might not like what you find......

he is stronger and braver then you are.... and you know it....

so you lash out and attack him for it...with every attack on him,
you only expose your fear of seeking within yourself.... you are afraid
of seeing as deeply as IAM see's.....

seek that which is deep within you... overcome your fear......

become who you are....

Kropotkin

[Zero_Sum]

One can easily imagine this "joker" who either can't or won't do anything against the rich and powerful fuckers that ream him up the ass along with all the rest of us, in his avatar persona, glowering at those here he can turn into scapegoats easily enough with his "world of words" harangues.

Oh, and just for the record [sigh] "even in my own words" I note time and again that in regard to "I" at the existential juncture of identiyt, value judgments and political economy, my own arguments here are no less existential contraptions rooted in dasein than his are.

I'm just less inclined to be that fulminating and fanatical Stooge/Kid he is. You know, in a philosophy forum.

Indeed, why the fuck is he even here when there are countless political forums out there he can do his "Joker thing" in with so many, many more there to "get the message". Or is he a "Joker" in all of those too?

No, seriously.

I'm here because you and your pals have virtually censored or banned every other internet platform out there with your neo-liberal Marxist global-homo bullshit. I hope that explains that.

I'll do something eventually, don't you worry about that, but as the old saying goes, there's a time and a season for everything. I'm just waiting for the right moment to strike back, we're not there yet.

You'll know when I'll be doing my own thing once we reach food riots everywhere, 100 million homeless in the streets, and 75% national unemployment. I take comfort that you and your kind will be helpless when all of that eventually transpires.

[Zero_Sum]

Of course Peter likes Biggie, naturally.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Of course Peter likes Biggie, naturally.

K: I hold that IAM is the best philosopher on this site...
bar none...... and you aren't even one of the top 100 best
philosophers on this site....and so, I admire him......
for trying to achieve that which you are so afraid to attempt....

a reevaluation of values... what does Zero actually believe and,
most importantly, why? why those values? and what do those values
me for Zero? what does it mean to be human? Zero has no idea
and that is the problem... Zero has all the depth of a sheet of
paper.... look deeper... challenge yourself into taking a deeper
look at yourself... what beliefs are actually your beliefs and
what beliefs are beliefs that have been indoctrinated into you?

Kropotkin

[iambiguous]

a creepy senile idiot

Note to others:

She allows herself to be reduced down to Pedro here.

Look, come on, in polemicist mode, I've been doing this for years now. You know damn well that what most of you want here is for someone to do to me what I effortlessly do to you: You want someone to make me look like the fool this time.

And I'm flat out admitting that if anyone here can, it's phoneutria. Just for the repartee alone I'd like to tangle with her. Instead, I'm stuck with likes of the Kids here.

But, as with Karpel Tunnel, she "foes" me not because she actually does think I am a "creepy senile idiot", but because she suspects instead that I will deconstruct her in turn.

So, merely by choosing the "foe" option, she keeps my arguments out of her head altogether.

On the other hand, maybe this "creepy senile idiot" retort is a reference to Zero_Brains.

In that case, never mind.

[Zero_Sum]

Of course Peter likes Biggie, naturally.

K: I hold that IAM is the best philosopher on this site...
bar none...... and you aren't even one of the top 100 best
philosophers on this site....and so, I admire him......
for trying to achieve that which you are so afraid to attempt....

a reevaluation of values... what does Zero actually believe and,
most importantly, why? why those values? and what do those values
me for Zero? what does it mean to be human? Zero has no idea
and that is the problem... Zero has all the depth of a sheet of
paper.... look deeper... challenge yourself into taking a deeper
look at yourself... what beliefs are actually your beliefs and
what beliefs are beliefs that have been indoctrinated into you?

Kropotkin

I believe in chaos and I also believe natural chaotic forces will destroy the abomination that is modern western civilization or society, I hope this clarifies things for you and Biggie. I feel I've been thoroughly consistent on this position for a great deal of many years now [decades] where it should be pretty obvious to all by now one would think.

[iambiguous]

I'm here because you and your pals have virtually censored or banned every other internet platform out there with your neo-liberal Marxist global-homo bullshit. I hope that explains that.

No, as always, that explains you. Well, to me anyway.

I'll do something eventually, don't you worry about that, but as the old saying goes, there's a time and a season for everything. I'm just waiting for the right moment to strike back, we're not there yet.

Sure, by all means, do keep us informed. I spent nearly 25 years myself as a political activist. Only, sure, for the wrong side, right? Of course in the end I came to recognize that objectivism itself is the biggest illusion of them all: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 5&t=185296

You'll know when I'll be doing my own thing once we reach food riots everywhere, 100 million homeless in the streets, and 75% national unemployment. I take comfort that you and your kind will be helpless when all of that eventually transpires.

Just out of curiosity, when was the first decade that you predicted this?

[Zero_Sum]

Biggie, you shaking your ass on a street corner waving a sign calling it political activism isn't even on my level.

Just out of curiosity, when was the first decade that you predicted this?

I was off by about ten years, it happens, it's called miscalculation. I'll own up to that.

Nonetheless, it's clear you and your kind don't pay attention whatsoever to current events unless it's a paid propagandist spoon feeding it to you.

[iambiguous]

Biggie, you shaking your ass on a street corner waving a sign calling it political activism isn't even on my level.

Even as the cartoon character that you are here, this is truly pathetic. Or are you just "paraquoting" Pedro? Your only hope -- perhaps -- being that you are in fact just playing this reactionary cartoon character. An exercise in irony in order to display how infantile their "arguments" really are.

Just out of curiosity, when was the first decade that you predicted this?

I was off by about ten years, it happens, it's called miscalculation. I'll own up to that.

Off by ten years...a miscalculation?

Note to Wendy:

A new poll please. This one: What will Joker call his political fantasies after 20 years?

Nonetheless, it's clear you and your kind don't pay attention whatsoever to current events unless it's a paid propagandist spoon feeding it to you.

Again, you can't possibly even believe this yourself. Even I refuse to believe that you actually are this...deluded.

It's all an act, right?

[Zero_Sum]

I can't wait to see what's going to happen in the next four to six years, you people are going to be utterly destroyed or annihilated and I will be out here enjoying myself in every sort of way imaginable.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Of course Peter likes Biggie, naturally.

K: I hold that IAM is the best philosopher on this site...
bar none...... and you aren't even one of the top 100 best
philosophers on this site....and so, I admire him......
for trying to achieve that which you are so afraid to attempt....

a reevaluation of values... what does Zero actually believe and,
most importantly, why? why those values? and what do those values
me for Zero? what does it mean to be human? Zero has no idea
and that is the problem... Zero has all the depth of a sheet of
paper.... look deeper... challenge yourself into taking a deeper
look at yourself... what beliefs are actually your beliefs and
what beliefs are beliefs that have been indoctrinated into you?

Kropotkin

I believe in chaos and I also believe natural chaotic forces will destroy the abomination that is modern western civilization or society, I hope this clarifies things for you and Biggie. I feel I've been thoroughly consistent on this position for a great deal of many years now [decades] where it should be pretty obvious to all by now one would think.

K: and leaving out the most important question, why? there is no value in chaos...
it doesn't create or become something greater... it just is....and the second
question is why do you believe that "the abomination that is the modern
western civilization or society" is a valid critique....

if you oppose this, then offer us an alternative to this.....

what society or civilization would meet your criteria.....

the problem as I see it, is that you don't offer us any alternative
to our "modern" society...... ok, you hate modern society...
so give us some alternative.....and of course answer the question
as to "why" this alternative is better then the current one....

as Is clear, I am no fan of the modern world myself...
and yet, I go into details about the who, what, where, why and how
of my opposition to the modern world and I offer up alternative
suggestions...for example, I am against the 1% because of.....

and I offer up suggestions as to how to end or eliminate the vast
income inequality which threatens to destroy the world.....

and what do you offer up?

mindless chaos and destruction which doesn't benefit anyone,

so give us something better..... if you can?

kropotkin

[iambiguous]

I can't wait to see what's going to happen in the next four to six years, you people are going to be utterly destroyed or annihilated and I will be out here enjoying myself in every sort of way imaginable.

Come on, think this through...

Ten years ago you were making much the same "calculations". So, based on your own past record, how confident can you be about this prediction?

And, please, if all of us scumbag liberals are "utterly destroyed", who is going to be around to take the brunt of your witless and sarcastic rants? You don't have any kids, right?

Now: Just tell me this is all an act and I'll move on to others.

[Karpel Tunnel]

if you oppose this, then offer us an alternative to this.....

He has done this. A number of times. That was part of the funny thing about your other thread, where you said a bunch of things the kids never do. When in fact a number of the people you call kids have done those things.

the problem as I see it, is that you don't offer us any alternative

[Peter Kropotkin]

Zero_Sum:
I believe in chaos and I also believe natural chaotic forces will destroy the abomination that is modern western civilization or society, I hope this clarifies things for you and Biggie. I feel I've been thoroughly consistent on this position for a great deal of many years now [decades] where it should be pretty obvious to all by now one would think.[/quote]

K: I see this very thing of which you are very proud of, as being a sign of weakness....

this "consistency" that you are very proud of, is a sign of weakness to me.....

You have held the exact same belief for years without any change....and yet,
your own personal situation and society situation has changed

to hold to the need for chaos and destruction, is to hold a viewpoint that
isn't any different then a 4 year old....

to destroy is far easier to do then to create.. IQ45 has proven that....
in fact, I see a remarkable likeness to you and IQ45.....
as to holding the exact same belief for years without any change
in values... and to the need for chaos...

you have no need for the "what is next" because you can't get past
your need for chaos.. the chaos that you so firmly desire happens,
now what? the world is in chaos and there is nothing to replace it....
any 4 year old can desire that.... give me something of replacement
to this that tells us you have progress further then a 4 year old....

the magical rebuilding of society to conform to "YOUR" idea of what
a society ought to be....talk about reaching for a utopia....
maybe, possibly if society self destructs, I can reach a utopian
society that fits my agenda of what society/culture should be....

with zero thought as to the possible ramifications as to what a collapse of
society/culture will do to millions upon millions upon millions of people
around you.....of course to be concerned about those millions of people,
you would actually have to some care or concern about people...
something you are lacking, no different than a 4 year old who is
only concern with fulfilling their need for destruction and chaos....

in a very real sense, you are a psychopath... watching millions of people
suffering while you enjoy it....that isn't being human.. that is following other
psychopaths like Hitler and Stalin and yes, IQ45...

and it wouldn't surprise me to watch you "own" being a psychopath.....

and that once again, brings us back to you being 4 years old....

for only a 4 years or a practicing psychopath would enjoy
being a psychopath..... everyone else would try to become
something more... but not you......watching others suffer
seems to be your stock in trade... the only thing you are capable of....

and that seems to me to be very, very, very sad...

Kropotkin

[Karpel Tunnel]

the real reason that IAM is the best philosopher here is because he is
staying true, being committed to solving his problems...
he doesn't go off message and derail a thread... his concern is
strictly about what concerns him... and frankly, I admire him
for his patience and persistence to keep up the good fight to
address his concerns....now some of you kids accuse him of derailing
a thread, whereas I don't see that at all..... he is keeping on message with
the concerns he is engaged with..

This was strange or funny or tragic. The reason he derail threads is because he keeps up the good fight to address his concerns. You are acting like the two are mutually exclusive, when in fact they are not remotely. In fact precisely the way he doggedly holds onto his interests in other people's threads is where the derailing comes from.

?????

That's precisely how he ends up derailing threads. Not his thread obviously where continuing to focus on his concerns would be on topic. But in other people's threads where he....yeah...fights to address his concerns. He keeps 'on message with the concerns he is engaged with.' On...his message.

His questions of existence are different then mine, I will admit to that,
but they are still legitimate concerns and worthy of discussion
and, AND admiration...

IAM has his set of problems and he is seeking a solution/solutions for
those set of problems... no different then Hume or Kant or Heidegger.....
and with a focus on his philosophical problems that we should congratulate
him for... not knock him....

You are comparing him to philosophers who produced, in any given decade complicated texts where the first pages did not resemble latter pages. No one here remotely lives up to the kind of work the people you mention did. No one. Iambs posts and patterns are amongst some of the most repetitive posting patterns I have ever seen. I do agree with you. I think, given his desire to resolve certain issues, it is a sign of committment that he has focused so long on those issues. But much of it involves cut and paste posts and repeating the same insults, assumptions, arguments. None of those guys did anything like that.

Notice also that you tell people what they knock him for and then chastize them for mocking him for that. But in fact they are not mocking him for doing thigns that philosophers like Hume did. They are not getting irritated at him for those things.

So you strawman, then chastize your straw man. And it is really quite remarkable that you don't know what people actually get irritated with him for. For some it is his political opinions. And anyone, including yourself and me, will get mocked and categorized for their political opinions here or for what people assume are our opinions. And all three of us mock back or start the mocking. For example. Some people consider him hypocritical. That he gets to act like an objectivist which is cake and eat it too. He can mock conservatives or right wing people and paint them as wrong or stupid, while adding that he knows this is just his perspective so he's better than them in that way also. Then there are people who criticize him for not responding, for insulting people via categories, for derailing threads (something none of the philosophers you mentioned could do, but further did not do either in the ways that were technologically possible back then.

I would in fact suggest that he is mocked and derided on this board
because of his dedication and his commitment to his issues....

Yes, just ignore what people say, tell them what they are really feeling and thinking.

and frankly, the kids just aren't smart enough to see that IAM
problems aren't just small, objectivist problems but universal
and in dire need of a solution problems....

'small objectivist problems?????????' It's phrases like that that continuously lead me to belief you have no idea what his philosophical positions are or even what objectivist means in his use of the term.

I would suggest that his "divided" Mind/ soul are a modern
and universal problem created by the various and unique
issues brought about by Modernity...I would suggest that what he
describes about himself is just other words we often use about ourselves,
alienation, disconnection, estrangement, separation....these words are quite
often used in a description about the 20/21 century and the people who
live within the 20/21th century...

The problem he has with his divided mind as you call it, or fractured and fragmented as he calls it is not created by modernity, though more people will be aware of it due to modern paradigms and the amount of cross-cultural knowledge we have, etc. But these do not cause the problem, they make it easier to see the problem. The problem was actually there in Rome, for example, where you had several cultures mixing, various belief systems available, various epistemologies available, and a variety of moral positions available to be believed in by many people. So, if it was there in Rome it was there in London in the 1700s, and to the French speaking Russians in the 1800s and in Constantinople going back a few thousand years, in many parts of every continent going back thousands of years. But again these places and mileaus were not the cause of the problem, the problem is part of being human or sentient.

You and Iamb just assume that if anyone has a problem with him, it is because of the content of his ideas.

And then from here we get Peter's psychic claims.

you are "fracture and divided" the only difference between you
and IAM is the fact he understand that and he is working toward a solution....

whereas you are not.....he see's deeper then you do and you of course,
condemn him because you are afraid of looking too deep within yourself...
because you might not like what you find......

he is stronger and braver then you are.... and you know it....

so you lash out and attack him for it...with every attack on him,
you only expose your fear of seeking within yourself.... you are afraid
of seeing as deeply as IAM see's.....

seek that which is deep within you... overcome your fear......

become who you are....

Ah, love that last part. If I said, you should be more like X (some person), do what he does so that you become who you are, Iamb would repeat that phrase for months, mocking it.

'Of, course KT is not as fractured and fragmented as me, because he knows who I should behave like, a man who sees deeply and can carry me to be who I am'.

And then he would ask that this be demonstrated such that every rational person believed this person, X, was closer to really being who he is, and how KT knew he was and knew the process would work for others.


HERE'S THE FUCKING IRONY PETER. You keep defending and lauding Iamb

But you don't have a fucking clue what he is actually saying.

He'd mock me for months if I said some of the things you do. You don't read the kid's posts much. Which is fine. But then you act like you know what they have not done. You don't read Iamb's posts about his philosophy much or perhaps you don't read them well. Because you don't understand them.

[Peter Kropotkin]

if you oppose this, then offer us an alternative to this.....

He has done this. A number of times. That was part of the funny thing about your other thread, where you said a bunch of things the kids never do. When in fact a number of the people you call kids have done those things.

the problem as I see it, is that you don't offer us any alternative

K: I am only capable of discussing matters with one kid at a time... wait your turn....

Kropotkin

[Karpel Tunnel]

You have held the exact same belief for years without any change....and yet,
your own personal situation and society situation has changed

Wait....in a thread about Iamb, where you compliment Iamb to the stars, you are critical of ZS for holding the same belief for years???????? That's funny.

Shall we go back over a decade and look at Iamb's views to see how much they have changed? Oh, wait. I did that.

And the fact is that ZS has changed his beliefs, even quite radically over the years. Something Iamb knows and has pointed out to ZS.

I mean, seriously PK, I don't you have the slightest handle on anything in this thread. And yet you are condescending. I shouldn't be surprised.

These go hand in hand a lot.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Karpel Tunnel:

HERE'S THE FUCKING IRONY PETER. You keep defending and lauding Iamb

But you don't have a fucking clue what he is actually saying.

He'd mock me for months if I said some of the things you do. You don't read the kid's posts much. Which is fine. But then you act like you know what they have not done. You don't read Iamb's posts about his philosophy much or perhaps you don't read them well. Because you don't understand them.[/quote]

K: if, if I am wrong about IAM, he is more then welcome to correct me about anything he
feels I am wrong about... he is a big boy as am I....

I don't need a kid to tell me what someone else is talking about... let the person
in question, in this case, IAM, tell me....

am I wrong or right? I am not even sure that is the real question...

the question I am fighting for, is the question of what is it that
I hold to be true? are my beliefs really my beliefs or do I simply
mimic the beliefs of the society or the state or my family or my religion?

for example, does god exists? the society and state and church and
my family has made belief in god to be "mandatory" and non-negotiable....

whereas I hold that we should seek to find out in our own reevaluation of values
if I really believe in god...is the belief in god, really my belief or do I simply
carry this belief because of what everyone else believes?

so, are your beliefs really your beliefs or do you simply mimic the beliefs
held by the society, the state, your family, the church, the media?

those are the questions of existence that I work toward and for....

Kropotkin

[Ecmandu]

Iambiguous is not intelligent enough yet to understand that he’s using a strange loop argument at times to be ‘undefeated’

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_loop

Möbius strip ... penrose stairs etc...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livesc ... strip.html

And again, per the op for this thread, “kid and stooge” are a process of objective categorization for iambiguous: Me and them, binary.

[Karpel Tunnel]

K: if, if I am wrong about IAM, he is more then welcome to correct me about anything he
feels I am wrong about... he is a big boy as am I....

I don't need a kid to tell me what someone else is talking about... let the person
in question, in this case, IAM, tell me....

hm, in the big boy world, other people get to point things like this out, also. I never assumed you needed me (and you can emphasize either 'needed' or 'me' and the sentence works for me) to tell you. In fact my main motivation is to point out that someone is judging people for being critical of Iamb and saying he is a great philospher, while not understand what his philosophy is, while making a statement that would get others mocked by Iamb, who is condescendingly lecturing us on the importance of his philososphy when he clearly misunderstands important facets of it. Nowhere was there a sense in me that you needed to be told. You seem content with what you believe.

the question I am fighting for, is the question of what is it that
I hold to be true? are my beliefs really my beliefs or do I simply
mimic the beliefs of the society or the state or my family or my religion?

There are some other options here. Beliefs are often formed via experience. Of course this neither means the beliefs are correct, nor does it mean they are necessarily yours. In fact, you may not even be aware you have them until something pushes them to the surface: like a divorce or a car crash, and suddenly you realize you believe something and have for a while. Or don't believe something. There are other options also.

But here's a kind of neo-Iamb question for you. You seem to think some of your beliefs are yours and some were not. How do you know when a belief you hold is 'yours' PK? What are your criteria for knowing/deciding this?

[iambiguous]

HERE'S THE FUCKING IRONY PETER. You keep defending and lauding Iamb

But you don't have a fucking clue what he is actually saying.

He'd mock me for months if I said some of the things you do. You don't read the kid's posts much. Which is fine. But then you act like you know what they have not done. You don't read Iamb's posts about his philosophy much or perhaps you don't read them well. Because you don't understand them.

I have already discussed this elsewhere:

So, what is an objectivist to me? An objectivist is someone who believes they are in sync with the real me [what some call the "soul"], in sync with the "right thing to do" in regard to moral and political and religious and esthetic value judgments.

Now, I am not inside Peter's head. I have no way of grasping for certain if, given my own set of assumptions, he reflects my own subjective parameters of objectivism.

But even if he does I would have no less respect for his intelligence. And for his commitment to come here day in and day out and actually pursue the sort of thinking that I myself associate with those who really do "love philosophy".

On the contrary, the mystery for me continues to be Karpel Tunnel/Moreno himself.

The part of him that continues to cling to his "visceral, intuitive, deep-down-inside-him" Self so as to keep the "fractured and fragmented" "I" at bay.

Only he doesn't have the intellectual integrity to pursue that with me in a serious exchange on the philosophy board. Instead, he hides behind the "foe" option to keep the points I raise out of his head altogether.

Again, ironically enough, the sort of reaction I usually get from the hardcore objectivists here.

And the Kids!

The bottom line is that I have no capability of demonstrating that to the extent someone is an objectivist they are wrong. In fact I may well be the one who is wrong.

But the other bottom line here is still that chickenshit Karpel Tunnel hides behind the "foe" function instead of taking this "visceral, intuitive deep-down-inside-me" Self of his and exploring it with me insofar as it can be compared and contrasted with my own "fractured and fragmented" "self". With respect to moral and political and religious value judgments.

[Ecmandu]

I was vague in my post about iambiguous using a strange loop argument to ‘defeat’ all his opponents...

Iambiguous: “I’m right unless I’m wrong”

Me: “Are you right or wrong about that?”

Iambiguous: “I’m right unless I’m wrong”

Me: “are you right or wrong about that?”

... see iambiguous actually isn’t a very self examined or particularly broadly experienced intelligence, BUT! He did find a niche with this strange loop argument to console him and refuse to do actual philosophy, real hard work that real people do, while he sits there and twiddles his thumbs in some bizarre sense of self importance.

You see, for real thinkers, proofs occur. That’s the hard fucking work. Like inventing the fucking Internet he’s using to communicate with. Iambiguous found a simple way to be a non working contradictory tastemaker with a strange loop.

Now I understand that he’s not that intelligent... I don’t think iambiguous understands much. But he found a place to console his ego with his lack of intellect, and that’s (I guess) a type of intelligence. Though I must admit, it’s not true and it’s not courageous.

[Peter Kropotkin]

Karpel Tunnel:

But here's a kind of neo-Iamb question for you. You seem to think some of your beliefs are yours and some were not. How do you know when a belief you hold is 'yours' PK? What are your criteria for knowing/deciding this?

K: and I am glad you asked....

until I was 20 or 21, say 1980... I simply held my parents beliefs...which
is to say, I didn't challenge the beliefs that had been indoctrinated into me....
I was a moderate democrat... for all I really cared about politics.. which
wasn't much....

as I have said before, the election of Uncle Ronnie in 1980 radicalized me..
I moved to California in 1973 and saw what kind of damage Raygun did to California,
and I didn't want that to happen to America... which it did...Raygun was one of the 5 worst
presidents of the United States...for reasons I can explain later if necessary..

so, Raygun get elected president... and I hated the idea but and this is important,
I didn't have any suggestions or alternative to him....
I was against raygun, but didn't have another choice to replace him...
or his ideology.....

hence I spent the 1980's reading, well just about everything.. from
Russian novels to British poets to German philosophers, often at the same time......

I was working out what I really did believe in and not just regurgitate what
my parents indoctrinated in me....

that study took years...I studied everything from philosophy to
political science to history to economics to reading novels.....

in roughly 1992 or 1993, I was changing my beliefs.. I had lost
faith in the Anarchism that I held... I didn't see how anarchism
was going to bring about a "better" America or a better future....
I felt that Anarchism was still in the future, and not in the present...
and why should I fight for something that wasn't going to happen
for centuries?

so, I made my third move or change in political beliefs...
I became a rather radical democrat..... which meant I could
influence events as they occurred, instead of waiting the two
centuries or so before anarchism would become effective...

so, how did I know what my beliefs were? I gauged them against
currents events... that is, in part, why I left anarchism...
the events didn't seem to allow for a place for anarchism to exist....

my beliefs are my beliefs because I have worked on them, studied
them, put them through the fire of existence... I lived my life via
my beliefs... I wasn't a closet anarchist who "played" at being an anarchist,
I was an anarchist in my day to day life.....every day, I work at being
an anarchist.... and then when that no longer worked, I left it....

a belief is only as strong as its ability to work in the real world......

now many here falsely accuse me of being an communist... but I studied
communism, very closely during the 80's... and I do not hold to that....

what is the basic political and economic belief, of communism?
that all functions of the political and economic are
centralized to the federal government... and I do not hold that....

hence I am not a communist... in fact, a totally centralized government
would miss some vital aspects of civilization that are key to living.....

but at times, at times, a centralized government is exactly what we need in order
to survive or function..... for example, this entire covid response requires, demands
a centralized response... that is why the countries of Europe handle covid far better
then America did...the central government was able to respond far better then
any localized state government could......and that is why our covid response has
been so really, really bad... the local states format was completely inadequate
to a national disaster like covid... when you have a national disaster, you must
have a national response....a state to state response cannot deal with a
national crisis.... as has been shown....

so, do I argue for one type of government? no, in fact, we should
change and adapt our government to the ever changing and current
events.... so, at times, we are a democracy which votes and elect
its officials, at times, we can keep our local and state governments
just as they are today and other times, we must expand our
base to include a national response instead of a local or state response....

I advocate a flexible and changeable government that is used to adapt
to the current situations that the government faces....

just as I advocate personal flexibility to our ever changing personal
conditions....a flexibility that allows different responses to different
situations...... you cannot respond to a disease the exact same way
one responds to a chair breaking.... the conditions are different and
so the response must be different...

and that is one argument for anarchism.... it is flexible... it changes and adapts
to the ever changing conditions we find ourselves in.....

and how do I "know" this to be true? I find that in my personal life,
part of the way to survive is to be able to change and adapt to the
ever changing conditions of existence....

if the conditions change, we too must change to adapt....
failure to adapt means we go the way of the dinosaur....

Kropotkin

[Ecmandu]

Peter,

Just like iambiguous, you deny that through blood sweat and tears that proofs have actually been found.

Maybe you’re not smart enough to understand those proofs ... that’s fine.

Moral proofs are like math proofs... they can take thousands of years to come by. But they do occur.

Like iambiguous, you are narcissistic ... you believe that because you were wrong about one thing one time that this means that everyone was, is and will always be wrong about everything ...

I know that you, iambiguous and Karpel are ignoring me ... that’s very simple, you three can’t handle the objective facts of your hypocrisy. I had to go to the emptiness of absolute worthlessness to be who I am today. I’m not saying that you should necessarily go there because I did (that’s fucking insane), but I write for you to hear me out.

I read all of your posts with dignity, and dignity doesn’t mean that I agree with you three, it simply means that I take the time to consider them in my mind and attempt to respond to them intelligently.

Binary is a real thing. Why pay for a cup of coffee for 3 dollars when they just hand you the cup and put nothing in it?